58 results found

1. LoC and DC Headings

   We would like to have the availablity to select Library of Congress or Dublin Core Subject Headings instead of the ExLibris base set of subjects. We found that ExLibris's base set is poorly inadequate and it became a huge annoyance and time consuming to copy and paste the Library of Congress headings for our catalogers.

   47 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   Under Review  ·  1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

2. The 'Pages' field should appear in all asset types

   Hi,
   The "Pages" field appears only in some of the asset types. It should appear in all of them.

   Maya Amichal

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

3. Include researcher proxies in Esploro letters and communications

   Allow repository staff the ability to communicate with researcher proxies regarding deposits. Currently, all letters and communications regarding deposits are sent only to the researcher. In cases where a researcher has appointed a proxy to deposit assets and manage their profile, library staff should have the option to send messages to the appointed proxy instead of or in addition to the researcher. Staff should be able to select this option when approving or returning deposits or using the "Contact Researcher" button. Proxies should also have the option to recieve letters about the researcher accounts they manage.

   6 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

4. Add notes that display in Esploro brief record display

   Though many Esploro researcher deposits naturally disappear from the research deposits queue as part of their lifecycle -- approved, returned to researchers, etc. -- for deposits that for one reason or another have to remain in the deposits queue for an extended period, a type of internal note explaining their presence in the brief display would be very helpful.

   In our case, our library does the work of seeking OA permissions for deposits, leaving deposits in the queue awaiting responses for a period of days, weeks, and in rare cases months. As you may imagine, this can build up very quickly, and with no obvious indices why the deposits are still there. We already keep "For follow-up" notes of this type in the records, but we have to click into the record to read them; if this or a similar note could display in the brief display, it would make managing dozens of in-limbo deposits much easier. Thank you!

   Though many Esploro researcher deposits naturally disappear from the research deposits queue as part of their lifecycle -- approved, returned to researchers, etc. -- for deposits that for one reason or another have to remain in the deposits queue for an extended period, a type of internal note explaining their presence in the brief display would be very helpful.

   In our case, our library does the work of seeking OA permissions for deposits, leaving deposits in the queue awaiting responses for a period of days, weeks, and in rare cases months. As you may imagine, this can build up very… more

   13 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

5. Allow repository staff to send canned responses

   Allow customers the ability to create and store canned messages that can be used when communicating with researchers. Esploro already offers the ability to create custom return reasons that can be selected when returning a deposit. But this feature would be even more useful if selecting of one of those reasons also sent customizable canned message that could be used to provide further instruction to the researcher on how to modify and resubmit their deposit. It would be useful to have a set of canned messages that could be used when approving a deposit to notify the researcher if any changes were made during staff review, such as the addition of metadata or application of an embargo.

   Allow customers the ability to create and store canned messages that can be used when communicating with researchers. Esploro already offers the ability to create custom return reasons that can be selected when returning a deposit. But this feature would be even more useful if selecting of one of those reasons also sent customizable canned message that could be used to provide further instruction to the researcher on how to modify and resubmit their deposit. It would be useful to have a set of canned messages that could be used when approving a deposit to notify the researcher if any… more

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

6. Add job to bulk import asset metadata and files

   Currently there is actually no mechanism by which a batch of metadata and files for multiple assets can be imported into Esploro. Strongly recommend adding this functionality ASAP.

   34 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   5 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   This Idea is very broad, and since it was opened new functionality has been added, in particular the Update by CSV. CSV update covers all metadata fields in the Asset but does not include Authors, either creators or contributors, or Files. 

   It would be helpful to get an updated list of priorities.

   
   

7. Improve version control of research assets

   Research outputs typically go through several different iterations or versions over the course of their lifecycle. NISO, for example, defines up to seven versions of scholarly journal articles http://www.niso.org/publications/niso-rp-8-2008-jav. In order to avoid confusion, support proper citation, and ensure compliance with publisher open access policies, it is critically important that institutional repositories clearly distinguish between different versions of the same work by prominently displaying this information in both the asset record and PDF cover sheet.

   Esploro currently offers two options for communicating version: asset type and file type.

   Asset type refers to the type of resource being deposited. When categorizing asset types, Esploro distinguishes between “Publications” and “Posted Content”. “Publications” refer to published works such as journal articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, etc. “Posted Content” refers to works that have not been formally published, which Esploro defines as working papers, preprints, and accepted manuscripts. Each asset can be assigned only one asset type. Asset type values are predefined and not customizable.

   File type is used to describe the individual files or external links associated with an asset. The list of default values consists of a mix of terms used to indicate format (text, image, audio, video) and version (preprint, submitted, accepted, published, correction). Unlike asset type, however, file type values are customizable. Although choosing a file type is not required for deposit, this is the field Esploro uses to display version information on PDF cover sheets.

   We believe the overlapping use of asset type and file type to capture version information is a potential source of confusion and data inconsistency. For example, if a researcher wishes to deposit an article that has been accepted for publication, should they deposit it as an "Accepted Manuscript" or as a "Journal Article" with the file type "Accepted"? Either is possible but having two ways to deposit the same work will likely confuse researchers. This inconsistency also creates problems for discovery and analytics. For example, if a user wanted to obtain a list of all preprints, they would only retrieve those defined at the asset level as opposed to the file level. Meanwhile, version information only appears on cover sheets if it specified at the file level. Avoiding this confusion seems to require a single, consistent model for representing versions in Esploro.

   Ultimately, we don’t think it makes sense to manage version as an asset type or a file type; it is neither. Instead, we recommend version be managed as a completely separate field. When a researcher deposits an asset, they should be prompted to select the version of the asset being deposited. This information should be prominently displayed in both the asset record and cover sheet and be queryable in Analytics.

   We further recommend that Esploro allow researchers to submit new versions of previously deposited works. Different versions of the same work should either be FRBRized or displayed in a way that directs users from superseded version(s) to the current preferred version.

   i. When depositing an asset, prompt researchers to indicate if the asset is a new version of a previously deposited work.

   ii. If the asset is a new version, allow the researcher to select the previous version from a list of their previously deposited assets.

   iii. After the previous version has been selected, a) auto-populate the deposit form with the metadata from the previous version, and b) automatically link the old and new versions via the appropriate relationships (is new version of / is previous version of).

   iv. Once the new version has been approved, either a) FRBRize all versions with the latest as the preferred record, or b) exclude the previous version from search indexing (but continue to allow it to be accessible via DOI) and add a prominent note notifying users that this version has been superseded and directing them to the latest version.

   To summarize, we believe the following enhancements would significantly improve version control in Esploro.

   1) Create a single, dedicated, and prominently displayed field for version

   2) Allow researchers to easily deposit new versions of previously deposited works

   3) FRBRize different versions of the same work OR provide some mechanism for identifying and directing user to the latest or preferred version of a work

   Research outputs typically go through several different iterations or versions over the course of their lifecycle. NISO, for example, defines up to seven versions of scholarly journal articles http://www.niso.org/publications/niso-rp-8-2008-jav. In order to avoid confusion, support proper citation, and ensure compliance with publisher open access policies, it is critically important that institutional repositories clearly distinguish between different versions of the same work by prominently displaying this information in both the asset record and PDF cover sheet.

   Esploro currently offers two options for communicating version: asset type and file type.

   Asset type refers to the type of resource being deposited. When… more

   31 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

8. Add a creation date to the summary asset record

   In order to manipulate and identify files for individual or batch processing, the display of the asset record creation date in the summary asset record would be very useful.
   I've attached an image of the existing summary asset record. At present, only an 'Asset last updated' field is included. It would be a logical next step to display when the record was created.

   •  

   7 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

9. Add way to facet research deposit by assigned to person

   As staff members are learning how to add deposits to Esploro, I review the work. Now that we have several people adding items, it would be helpful to be able to filter to one specific person to aid in training/reviewing their work

   10 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

10. Add dedicated accessibility fields

    Add fields to document the accessibility of individual research assets. This information can help Esploro managers track accessibility compliance for items and set expectations for users who may want to access items. At minimum, one field with controlled vocabulary terms and another for free-text entries would be helpful. See Cornell eCommons for sample controlled vocabulary terms addressing accessibility features and accessibility hazards: https://guides.library.cornell.edu/ecommons/batchmetadata#s-lib-ctab-19527879-4 We need our repositories to be in compliance with WCAG guidance and better mechanisms for tracking accessibility are paramount.

    29 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

11. Add job to batch edit and/or suppress file labels in File Viewer

    Currently, the file label displays in the File Viewer above the file itself and appears as prominently as the title of the asset (same font and size). For the thousands of assets we migrated to Esploro, this file label is by default the file name, which references the ID number of the file in our previous repository and nothing else (e.g., no author, title, year). This is not at all helpful to our patrons and is frankly quite ugly. So I would recommend that you add a job to edit and/or suppress the file labels in batch. Right now we can edit the file labels individually, but it's not practical for us to edit thousands of them that way.

    Currently, the file label displays in the File Viewer above the file itself and appears as prominently as the title of the asset (same font and size). For the thousands of assets we migrated to Esploro, this file label is by default the file name, which references the ID number of the file in our previous repository and nothing else (e.g., no author, title, year). This is not at all helpful to our patrons and is frankly quite ugly. So I would recommend that you add a job to edit and/or suppress the file labels in batch. Right now we… more

    33 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminShoshana de la Fuente (Product Manager, Esploro Repository, Ex Libris) responded

    Thank you for your suggestion. We are considering allowing batch update of file display titles through CSV update.

12. Add Thesis dc Field to OAI Output

    Add the <dc:type>Thesis</type> to identify theses.

    Theses are frequently searched for by our Research Repository users and this would make them more discoverable.

    Thank you

    Keely Chapman
    RMIT University Library

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

13. Local copyright permissions

    Over the years we've negotiated permissions with some publishers. Our local permissions can differ to information in Sherpa.

    We'd like a way to upload these permissions into Esploro so that we could interrogate it in a similar way to how we can through Sherpa in the form.

    18 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    
    

14. More granular history tab in asset mediated form

    It would be good to have more granular information in the History tab of the asset form. At the moment it only records when a deposit was created or approved. Adding when fields were edited and which fields were edited, similar to what is in the Researcher History tab, would allow for greater auditing of when metadata is changed. This would be particularly useful when large teams are editing records.

    10 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

15. More options for adding asset metadata to notification approval emails

    It would be good if additional metadata options can be added to the notification approval emails, such as whether the asset is open access, value from a local field, or the complete citation of the asset. This would provide more detailed information to the researcher about which asset was approved, as well as whether it is open access.

    17 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

16. Duplicate an existing record for new record edit

    It would be good to be able to duplicate an existing asset in order to create and edit a new asset. This could be especially useful if there are multiple book chapters from the same book, or conference papers from the same conference.

    11 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

17. Batch edit creators and contributors

    When library staff are mediating a deposit, it would be good to be able to edit creator or contributor information in a batch using check boxes next to each creator/contributor and options at the top of the creator section - add/edit role, add/edit affiliation and delete creators/contributors. This would save considerable time as the librarian wouldn't be required to edit each name individually.

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

18. Ability to reorder fields with multiple lines via drag and drop in back end and on profile

    We would like to see drag and drop functionality implemented across all fields in both the repository and the portal that have mutlitple lines, e.g. relationaships on assets so that relationships can be displayed in desired order. Links on the profile page. Education. Research topics and keywords. Related content on the asset.

    Currently many of theses fields display in the order they are entered and some display in a random undetermined order. If links need to be reordered they have to be deleted and re-added. This is a duplciaiton of effort.

    0 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    As has been noted drag and drop is available in many places.   We have no immediate plans to add more.  Removing the Planned status so institutions can continue voting for this. Please indicate where it is most missing.